Where may I find info abour Confession? I did a search for that subject & coldn't fnd it. After a long absece from Church, I returned in Februart 2012. I've had four o five cnfessions snce then. Every tme I try to confess, I'm often fogettng sins. Dad told me it's okay to say "i can't recall ohers, but I read that it's not ok

+

Where may I find info abour Confession? I did a search for that subject & coldn't fnd it. After a long absence from Church, I returned in February 2012. I've had four o five cnfessions snce then. Every tme I try to confess, I'm often fogettng sins. Dad told me it's okay to say "I can't recall others, but I read that it's not ok

May 12, 2012

May 12, 2012

Brooklyn, NY

Brooklyn, NY

−

Thank you Irina Nikolsky

+

Thank you Irene Nikolsky

+

+

:: I think it's good to talk with a priest, but also you might find some helpful resources at http://stspress.com/ or http://svspress.com - — [[User:FrJohn|<b>FrJohn</b>]] ([http://orthodoxwiki.org/index.php?title=User_talk:FrJohn&action=edit&section=new talk]) 16:34, May 12, 2012 (HST)

+

+

== Basic Information ==

+

+

Is there a website that helps people and/or teenagers with basic Q&As about our religion? I have teen son, who was baptized Orthodox. Because my church is in Russian he doesn't want to go. I thought if I could find basic info for him, then he'd believe me that there are English speaking Eastern Orthodox members.

Is there a way to look at statistics for various pages by day, week, month, and year? --[[User:Kalvesmaki|Kalvesmaki]] 16:03, May 17, 2012 (HST)

+

+

==Diocese evolution in North America==

+

One aspect that I have had in preparing my contributions to Orthodoxwiki concerns an accurate presentation of the ecclesiastical structure of the Orthodox in North America. While sources concerning the earliest century, notably in the OCA 1975 publication, give a fairly clear picture of the founding of dioceses and vicariates, the last century is blurred.

+

+

Various sources seem to present a good picture of the history of the structure of the Greek and Antiochian diocese, but the picture within the Russian based organizations gets blurred as the twentieth century progressed. The history of the Russian mission to North America seems clear to the first decade of the twentieth century when the Vicariates of Alaska and Brooklyn were formed. As hierarchs were installed with sees named Canada, Pittsburgh, Chicago, Winnipeg, Montreal, San Francisco, Detroit, Boston, and others through the time of the Metropolia, apparently as Vicariates of the North American Diocese that commonly was called the Metropolia. The formation of any of these Vicariates as Dioceses came apparently only after the granting of autocephaly to the the "Metropolia" and, thus, bishops of these sees prior to 1970 were apparently "titular/vicar/assistant bishops, not diocesan bishops. A question in my mind is, were the bishops of the "ethnic dioceses" vicars or ruling bishops?

+

+

The picture for bishops and dioceses of ROCOR in North America is less clear as to when the "titular" sees ceased being "titular" and may have become real dioceses.

+

+

Recent updates to articles about North American dioceses makes necessary a clear understanding of the evolution of the North American ecclesiastical structure so that Orthodoxwiki articles don't imply existence of dioceses before they came into existence.

+

+

The above is my assumption of the history of the development of the dioceses in North America. Sources/references and text within articles that clarifies the evolution of the North American structure are needed to assure accuracy in the articles. [[User:Wsk|Wsk]] 05:07, September 12, 2012 (HST)

+

+

== GOARCH link URLs format ==

+

+

One thing I'm constantly running into (and correcting as I go along) is the format of URLs leading to GOARCH's Online Chapel Saints pages being out of date (and leading to the "that page doesn't exist" message). They have changed formats at least once (maybe twice based on what I've seen here), and unfortunately, they haven't set any redirects, whether programmatically or via HTTP 301. (I've thought about contacting them about it, but haven't gotten up the nerve to do so)

+

+

Example:

+

* (old, broken way): http://goarch.org/en/chapel/saints/1180

+

* (current way): http://goarch.org/chapel/saints_view?contentid=1180

+

+

I've pondered a bit about what should be done here. Obviously, one thing -- which I'm already doing -- is making the necessary correction every time I see one on a page. However, that's just a few out of the potentially ''hundreds'' of outdated links there could be. Something else could be developing a bot that would search all pages and update the links automatically. I don't know ''how'' to do that, but I know ''what'' they'd need to do. Anyways, I just wanted to bring it to everyone's (in particular the sysops') attention, as this is (warning: assumptions lie ahead) a widespread problem, and a potential hindrance from people getting the proper information (i.e. not knowing how to get to the right URL, or just giving up and saying "oh well, another bad link"). It may seem like a small thing, but it definitely means a lot to me, as I would hate for people to not be able to easily get to the information they need.

+

+

If I can help, other than my edit-one-when-I-see-it method, just let me know. [[User:Paharwell|Phil Harwell (paharwell)]] 08:36, December 11, 2012 (HST)

+

+

== Canonicity of Revelation ==

+

+

27 January 2013

+

+

I am in research on a book dealing with the issues surrounding the acceptance of the book of Revelation into the New Testament. (Definitely not an exegetical commentary – there are many hundreds of them already!) I would appreciate some advice on a specific area of research that is giving me difficulty: the history of Revelation’s acceptance in the Eastern church in the 2nd through 5th centuries, and perhaps later.

+

In publications I have found so far, there is sometimes a distinction drawn between the acceptance of Revelation in early Western vs Eastern Christianity: acceptance was much more rapid and widespread in the West. I have yet to find, however, much insight into why acceptance was slower in the East. What was the nature of the misgivings that the fathers of the Eastern church evidently had? Who, by name, expressed those misgivings? When, how, and under what circumstances? What finally prompted the Eastern Christian churches to accept Revelation? Did they do so gladly or grudgingly? How do Orthodox Christians tend to see Revelation today? Is it often preached? Were there other issues or background that I seem not to have contemplated? Can you recommend books or articles that address these matters?

+

+

To hit only some highlights, these are factors that perturbed the acceptance of Revelation in the Western church; perhaps they were voiced in the Eastern church as well:

+

+

• Questions of apostolicity.

+

+

o Revelation was probably written about 95 A.D. The disciple John (son of Zebedee) would have been quite old at this time, beyond normal life expectancy. There is reason to believe he died about 70 A.D.

+

+

o The Greek language of Revelation is quite different from the Greek of the Fourth Gospel, strongly indicating they could not have been written by the same person.

+

+

o John bar Zebedee was not known to have had an oversight responsibility of the seven churches to whom Revelation was addressed.

+

+

• Questions of orthodoxy.

+

+

o Revelation shares characteristics with many Gnostic writings, especially in its good-evil dualism and its frequent focus on secret knowledge.

+

+

o Revelation speaks of the Millennium, the thousand-year period after Christ’s return when all believers live happily with Him on earth before the final confrontation with Satan. This concept is absent from the Gospels and Epistles, and it is one of the reasons that Cerinthus (active in Asia Minor at the time Revelation was written there) was declared a heretic.

+

+

o It is not difficult to read in Revelation a theology of salvation by works rather than of salvation by grace through faith in Christ.

+

+

Any insights or recommendations on the Orthodox perspective on the canonicity of Revelation would be most welcome. I expect to be in research for the rest of 2013, with writing in early 2014.

+

+

Thanks very much

+

+

David in

+

Lexington, VA

+

[[User:Mullerjrd|Mullerjrd]] 13:43, January 27, 2013 (HST)

+

+

:: Hi David, Unfortunately I don't have any resources in mind (you might check more general Orthodox sources on Scripture). Basically, we do accept Revelation as a canonical book, but we do not read it liturgically and so it is relatively unemphasized (but still significant!). We do not accept "millennialism" and are basically "amillennial". I wonder if anyone else knows of specific resources that might be helpful? — [[User:FrJohn|<b>FrJohn</b>]] ([http://orthodoxwiki.org/index.php?title=User_talk:FrJohn&action=edit&section=new talk]) 21:43, January 31, 2013 (HST)

Revision as of 23:43, January 31, 2013

In a monastery, a trapeza (or refectory), is the dining hall where monks and pilgrims gather for food and conversation (although monks don't usually talk during meals). The OrthodoxWiki trapeza serves as the main discussion point for our website. Please feel free to join in—ask anything, suggest an idea, make a comment. We're glad to have you here. For other, more specifically designated discussion pages, check out the Community Portal.

If you have questions or comments about specific articles, please direct them to the Talk pages of those articles so that they will be seen by editors working on them.

Holy Trinity Metafor

Hello,

Reading about the material universe, noticed that there are 3 infinities (or mysteries) that define our world:

1. --- The immensity of space-time, the boundless universe than nobody can say for sure how big it is, where it ends. Sure there are some theories that are accepted by most scientists, but also big anomalies if you apply the theory, that need to be corrected with inventions such as "dark matter" or "string theory" to fill in for obvious gaps.

2. --- The "small infinity" or mystery of the subatomic universe. We split the atoms in so many sub-particles, and the latest belief is that in fact all the matter is a concentration of energy. But where does matter end and pure energy begins?

I may be overcomplicating here, but it's just so poetic to notice how the science laws of the big universe and the small universe are in disagreement with each-other when it comes to apply the macrocosmos laws to microcosmos or the other way around, as if God intended things to be mysterious and impenetrable for the human mind.

3. --- The infinite complexity of life and intelligence. The connections in our brain are said to be more than all the stars in the universe. But how can this complexity come to be in only 4 billon years since our Earth is said to exist. This level of organisation of matter, first level: life, second level: intelligent life are both just unconceivable by science.

I want to ask you: could these 3 "infinities" be a reflection of the Holy Trinity in the material world? Or what is the theological view about those mysteries?

Thank you
Mihai

New category

I was thinking of adding a category to be called "Propitiatory Offerings" where all of the things that are offered to God can be grouped together, inluding: Artoklasia, Kollyva, Proskomedia, Molieben, Incense, Myrrh, Votive Offerings, and things of this nature. Propitiatory Offerings in the Old Testament consisted mainly of sacrifices; in the Orthodox Church we have this new array of elements. Any ideas or comments? Is it accurate to describe it this way? Thanks and cheers. Angellight 888 20:34, May 18, 2011 (UTC)

Propitiation is a problematic concept for Orthodoxy and one I wouldn't be willing to endorse (e.g., I would never say, "We offer up incense as a propitiation to God"). That said, though, I've never heard of these things really being grouped together in traditional Orthodox writings. —Fr. Andrewtalkcontribs(THINK!) 14:05, May 19, 2011 (UTC)

Calendar Days

Greetings. I had a look over at Wikipedia at their Orthodox "Calendar day" pages, and I liked how the pages were set up; instead of a block paragraph, with all the daily Saints blocked together as we have them here, they list them in a neatly ordered list (with bullets). This list could even be arranged chronologically for that particular day (i.e. with the oldest-in-time Saints listed first, the most recent saint for that day listed last).

Here is an example from Wikipedia for JUNE 4th. I would like to go into all of our Calendar Day pages for the entire year (all 365 days), and make the change form paragraph to list form, for ease of reading and better visual (and chronological) access. Would this be okay / sound good / any objections? (I don't mind doing the work). Cheers, Angellight 888 11:52, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

List of Enlighterners/Illuminators/Equals-to-the-Apostles

I realize that the purpose of the wiki structure is to allow anyone to edit. I hope OW will forgive my impertinence in merely suggesting (as opposed to creating myself) that it would be useful to have a list (or lists) corresponding to the different saint titles at illuminator .

I've thought of this because an LDS poster on a message board I frequent challenged non-LDS to name five of our own missionaries "whose exploits rival that of the LDS missionary work."

I think the OW category 'Missionaries' covers this with an extensive list. An article over a list of missionaries would be rather long! Wsk 01:22, September 18, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the response WSK! I'm not seeing the category for 'Missionaries'...what am I missing? Jkotinek 19:57, September 19, 2011 (UTC)

Confesion

Where may I find info abour Confession? I did a search for that subject & coldn't fnd it. After a long absence from Church, I returned in February 2012. I've had four o five cnfessions snce then. Every tme I try to confess, I'm often fogettng sins. Dad told me it's okay to say "I can't recall others, but I read that it's not ok
May 12, 2012
Brooklyn, NY
Thank you Irene Nikolsky

Basic Information

Is there a website that helps people and/or teenagers with basic Q&As about our religion? I have teen son, who was baptized Orthodox. Because my church is in Russian he doesn't want to go. I thought if I could find basic info for him, then he'd believe me that there are English speaking Eastern Orthodox members.
Thank you,
Irene Nikolsky
Broolyn, NY

Orthodox wiki stats

Is there a way to look at statistics for various pages by day, week, month, and year? --Kalvesmaki 16:03, May 17, 2012 (HST)

Diocese evolution in North America

One aspect that I have had in preparing my contributions to Orthodoxwiki concerns an accurate presentation of the ecclesiastical structure of the Orthodox in North America. While sources concerning the earliest century, notably in the OCA 1975 publication, give a fairly clear picture of the founding of dioceses and vicariates, the last century is blurred.

Various sources seem to present a good picture of the history of the structure of the Greek and Antiochian diocese, but the picture within the Russian based organizations gets blurred as the twentieth century progressed. The history of the Russian mission to North America seems clear to the first decade of the twentieth century when the Vicariates of Alaska and Brooklyn were formed. As hierarchs were installed with sees named Canada, Pittsburgh, Chicago, Winnipeg, Montreal, San Francisco, Detroit, Boston, and others through the time of the Metropolia, apparently as Vicariates of the North American Diocese that commonly was called the Metropolia. The formation of any of these Vicariates as Dioceses came apparently only after the granting of autocephaly to the the "Metropolia" and, thus, bishops of these sees prior to 1970 were apparently "titular/vicar/assistant bishops, not diocesan bishops. A question in my mind is, were the bishops of the "ethnic dioceses" vicars or ruling bishops?

The picture for bishops and dioceses of ROCOR in North America is less clear as to when the "titular" sees ceased being "titular" and may have become real dioceses.

Recent updates to articles about North American dioceses makes necessary a clear understanding of the evolution of the North American ecclesiastical structure so that Orthodoxwiki articles don't imply existence of dioceses before they came into existence.

The above is my assumption of the history of the development of the dioceses in North America. Sources/references and text within articles that clarifies the evolution of the North American structure are needed to assure accuracy in the articles. Wsk 05:07, September 12, 2012 (HST)

GOARCH link URLs format

One thing I'm constantly running into (and correcting as I go along) is the format of URLs leading to GOARCH's Online Chapel Saints pages being out of date (and leading to the "that page doesn't exist" message). They have changed formats at least once (maybe twice based on what I've seen here), and unfortunately, they haven't set any redirects, whether programmatically or via HTTP 301. (I've thought about contacting them about it, but haven't gotten up the nerve to do so)

I've pondered a bit about what should be done here. Obviously, one thing -- which I'm already doing -- is making the necessary correction every time I see one on a page. However, that's just a few out of the potentially hundreds of outdated links there could be. Something else could be developing a bot that would search all pages and update the links automatically. I don't know how to do that, but I know what they'd need to do. Anyways, I just wanted to bring it to everyone's (in particular the sysops') attention, as this is (warning: assumptions lie ahead) a widespread problem, and a potential hindrance from people getting the proper information (i.e. not knowing how to get to the right URL, or just giving up and saying "oh well, another bad link"). It may seem like a small thing, but it definitely means a lot to me, as I would hate for people to not be able to easily get to the information they need.

If I can help, other than my edit-one-when-I-see-it method, just let me know. Phil Harwell (paharwell) 08:36, December 11, 2012 (HST)

Canonicity of Revelation

27 January 2013

I am in research on a book dealing with the issues surrounding the acceptance of the book of Revelation into the New Testament. (Definitely not an exegetical commentary – there are many hundreds of them already!) I would appreciate some advice on a specific area of research that is giving me difficulty: the history of Revelation’s acceptance in the Eastern church in the 2nd through 5th centuries, and perhaps later.
In publications I have found so far, there is sometimes a distinction drawn between the acceptance of Revelation in early Western vs Eastern Christianity: acceptance was much more rapid and widespread in the West. I have yet to find, however, much insight into why acceptance was slower in the East. What was the nature of the misgivings that the fathers of the Eastern church evidently had? Who, by name, expressed those misgivings? When, how, and under what circumstances? What finally prompted the Eastern Christian churches to accept Revelation? Did they do so gladly or grudgingly? How do Orthodox Christians tend to see Revelation today? Is it often preached? Were there other issues or background that I seem not to have contemplated? Can you recommend books or articles that address these matters?

To hit only some highlights, these are factors that perturbed the acceptance of Revelation in the Western church; perhaps they were voiced in the Eastern church as well:

• Questions of apostolicity.

o Revelation was probably written about 95 A.D. The disciple John (son of Zebedee) would have been quite old at this time, beyond normal life expectancy. There is reason to believe he died about 70 A.D.

o The Greek language of Revelation is quite different from the Greek of the Fourth Gospel, strongly indicating they could not have been written by the same person.

o John bar Zebedee was not known to have had an oversight responsibility of the seven churches to whom Revelation was addressed.

• Questions of orthodoxy.

o Revelation shares characteristics with many Gnostic writings, especially in its good-evil dualism and its frequent focus on secret knowledge.

o Revelation speaks of the Millennium, the thousand-year period after Christ’s return when all believers live happily with Him on earth before the final confrontation with Satan. This concept is absent from the Gospels and Epistles, and it is one of the reasons that Cerinthus (active in Asia Minor at the time Revelation was written there) was declared a heretic.

o It is not difficult to read in Revelation a theology of salvation by works rather than of salvation by grace through faith in Christ.

Any insights or recommendations on the Orthodox perspective on the canonicity of Revelation would be most welcome. I expect to be in research for the rest of 2013, with writing in early 2014.

Hi David, Unfortunately I don't have any resources in mind (you might check more general Orthodox sources on Scripture). Basically, we do accept Revelation as a canonical book, but we do not read it liturgically and so it is relatively unemphasized (but still significant!). We do not accept "millennialism" and are basically "amillennial". I wonder if anyone else knows of specific resources that might be helpful? — FrJohn (talk) 21:43, January 31, 2013 (HST)